PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you all. Good evening. I want to thank Prime
Minister Tony Blair for coming to Washington to discuss his recent visit to
Iraq. The Prime Minister met with key leaders of the new Iraqi government
that represents the will of the Iraqi people and reflects their nation's
diversity. As Prime Minister Blair will tell you, Iraqi Prime Minister
Maliki outlined an aggressive agenda to bring security to the Iraqi people,
to improve electricity and other essential services, and to pursue a
strategy for national reconciliation.

The agenda that Prime Minister Maliki has outlined demonstrates that Iraq's
new government understands its duty to deliver real improvements in the
daily lives of the Iraqi people. The formation of a new government
represents a new beginning for Iraq and a new beginning for the
relationship between Iraq and our coalition. The United States and Great
Britain will work together to help this new democracy succeed. We'll take
advantage of this moment of opportunity and work with Iraq's new government
to strengthen its young democracy and achieve victory over our common
enemies.

As we celebrate this historic moment, it's important to recall how we got
there, and take stock on how far we've come over the last three years. The
violence and bloodshed in Iraq has been difficult for the civilized world
to comprehend. The United States and Great Britain have lost some of our
finest men and women in combat. The car bombings and suicide attacks and
other terrorist acts have also inflicted great suffering on the Iraqi
people. And Iraqis have increasingly become the principal victims of
terror and sectarian reprisal.

Yet, in the face of this ongoing violence, each time the Iraqi people
voiced their opinion, they chose freedom. In three different elections,
millions of Iraqis turned out to the polls and cast their ballots. Because
of their courage, the Iraqis now have a government of their choosing,
elected under the most modern and democratic constitution in the Arab
world. The birth of a free and democratic Iraq was made possible by the
removal of a cruel dictator.

The decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power was controversial. We did
not find the weapons of mass destruction that we all believed were there --
and that's raised questions about whether the sacrifice in Iraq has been
worth it. Despite setbacks and missteps, I strongly believe we did and are
doing the right thing. Saddam Hussein was a menace to his people; he was a
state sponsor of terror; he invaded his neighbors. Investigations proved
he was systematically gaming the oil-for-food program in an effort to
undermine sanctions, with the intent of restarting his weapons programs
once the sanctions collapsed and the world looked away.

If Saddam Hussein were in power today, his regime would be richer, more
dangerous and a bigger threat to the region and the civilized world. The
decision to remove Saddam Hussein was right.

But not everything since liberation has turned out as the way we had
expected or hoped. We've learned from our mistakes, adjusted our methods,
and have built on our successes. From changing the way we train the Iraqi
security forces to rethinking the way we do reconstruction, our commanders
and our diplomats in Iraq are constantly adapting to the realities on the
ground. We've adapted our tactics, yet the heart of our strategy remains
the same: to support the emergence of a free Iraq that can govern itself,
sustain itself, and defend itself.

All our efforts over the past three years have been aimed towards this
goal. This past weekend, the world watched as Iraqis stood up a free and
democratic government in the heart of the Middle East. With our help, Iraq
will be a powerful force for good in a troubled region, and a steadfast
ally in the war on terror.

With the emergence of this government, something fundamental changed in
Iraq last weekend. While we can expect more violence in the days and weeks
ahead, the terrorists are now fighting a free and constitutional
government. They're at war with the people of Iraq, and the Iraqi people
are determined to defeat this enemy, and so are Iraq's new leaders, and so
are the United States and Great Britain.

It is vital that Iraq's new government seize this opportunity to heal old
wounds and set aside sectarian differences and move forward as one nation.
As Prime Minister Maliki has made his priorities clear, we have learned
they're the right priorities. He's said he will focus on improving the
security situation in Baghdad and other parts of the country. He has
declared he will use maximum force to defeat the terrorists. He's vowed to
eliminate illegal militias and armed gangs. He wants to accelerate the
training of the Iraqi security forces so they can take responsibility from
coalition forces for security throughout Iraq. He wants to improve health
care and housing and jobs, so the benefits of a free society will reach
every Iraqi citizen.

Our coalition will seize this moment, as well. I look forward for
continued in-depth discussions with Tony Blair, so we can develop the best
approach in helping the new Iraqi government achieve its objectives. The
new government of Iraq will have the full support of our two countries and
our coalition, and we will work to engage other nations around the world to
ensure that constitutional democracy in Iraq succeeds and the terrorists
are defeated.

Mr. Prime Minister.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Thank you, Mr. President, and can I say what a
pleasure it is to be with you again at the White House. And thank you for
your welcome.

As everyone knows, I was in Iraq earlier in this week, in Baghdad. And I
was able to discuss with the new leaders of Iraq firsthand their experience
and their hopes and expectations for the future. And I came away thinking
that the challenge is still immense, but I also came away more certain than
ever that we should rise to it. And though it is, at times, daunting, it
is also utterly inspiring to see people from all the different parts of the
community in Iraq -- the Sunni, the Shia, the Kurds -- sitting down
together, all of them democratic leaders, democratically elected by their
people; elected for a four-year term; elected and choosing to come together
as a government of national unity, and completely determined to run their
country in a different way for the future.

Anybody who studies the program of the Iraqi government can't fail to see
the similarities with the type of program that any of us would want to see
for our countries. And what is remarkable about it is that they put the
emphasis, of course, on the issues to do with economic recovery and
reconstruction and all the problems of infrastructure that they have in
their country, but they also very clearly commit themselves to
reconciliation between the different parts of the country, to the fight
against sectarianism, and to the defeat of terrorism.

And I think what is important now is to say that after three years, which
have been very, very difficult indeed, and when at times it looked
impossible for the democratic process to work, I think after these three
years and the democratic process working and producing this government,
then it is our duty, but it is also the duty of the whole of the
international community, to get behind this government and support it,
because the other thing that came across to me very strongly from talking
to them was that the reason there is bloodshed and violence in Iraq is that
the very forces that we are confronting everywhere, including in our own
countries, who want to destroy our way of life, also want to destroy their
hope of having the same type of life. In other words, the very forces that
are creating this violence and bloodshed and terrorism in Iraq are those
that are doing it in order to destroy the hope of that country and its
people to achieve democracy, the rule of law and liberty.

And I think there is a pattern here for us in the international community.
I know the decision to remove Saddam was deeply divisive for the
international community, and deeply controversial. And there's no point in
rehearsing those arguments over and over again. But whatever people's
views about the wisdom of that decision, now that there is a democratic
government in Iraq, elected by its people, and now they are confronted with
those whose mission it is to destroy the hope of democracy, then our sense
of mission should be equal to that and we should be determined to help them
defeat this terrorism and violence.

And I believe very, very strongly, indeed -- even more so having talked to
the leaders there and now coming back and examining our own situation and
how we help -- I'm more than ever convinced that what is important for them
in Iraq is to know that we will stand firm with them in defeating these
forces of reaction.

I believe the same, incidentally, is true of the struggle in Afghanistan,
where, again, exactly the same forces of terrorism and reaction want to
defeat the hopes of people for progress. I would also like to think -- and
this is something the President and I were discussing earlier, we will
carry on discussing over tonight and tomorrow -- and that is the importance
of trying to unite the international community behind an agenda that means,
for example, action on global poverty in Africa, and issues like Sudan; it
means a good outcome to the world trade round, which is vital for the whole
of the civilized world, vital for developing countries, but also vital for
countries such as ourselves, for progress in the Middle East, and for
ensuring that the global values that people are actually struggling for
today in Iraq are global values we take everywhere and fight for everywhere
that we can in our world today.

So I would like to pay tribute also to the work that our forces do there.
I think both our countries can be immensely proud of their heroism and
their commitment and their dedication.

But one very interesting thing happened to me when I was there and talking
to some of our armed forces, and talking, also, to the Iraqi soldiers that
were working alongside them, and that is, for all the differences in
culture and background and nationality, both of them were working together
in a common cause, and that was to help a country that was once a
brutalized dictatorship, become a country that enjoys the same rights and
the same freedoms that we take for granted here, and in the United Kingdom.
And for all the hardship and the challenge of the past few years, I still
think that is a cause worth standing up for.

Thank you, Mr. President.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Terry.

Q Mr. President, Pentagon officials have talked about prospects for
reducing American forces in Iraq to about 100,000 by year's end. Does the
formation of a unity government in Iraq put you on a sound footing to
achieve that number?

And Mr. Prime Minister, is it realistic to think that Iraqi forces will be
able to take control of all Iraq by the end of next year as Mr. Malaki
suggests?

PRESIDENT BUSH: First of all, we're going to work with our partners in
Iraq, the new government, to determine the best way forward in achieving an
objective, which is an Iraq that can govern itself and sustain itself and
defend itself.

I have said to the American people, as the Iraqis stand up, we'll stand
down. But I've also said that our commanders on the ground will make that
decision. And I have -- we'll talk to General Casey once he is --
conferred with the new government of Iraq. They don't have a defense
minister yet; they're in the process of getting a defense minister. So it
probably makes a lot of sense for our commander on the ground to wait until
their defense structure is set up before we discuss with them, and he with
me, the force levels necessary to achieve our objective.

Q So the 100,000 --

PRESIDENT BUSH: That's some speculation in the press that I -- they
haven't talked to me about. And as the Commander-in-Chief, they eventually
will talk to me about it. But the American people need to know that we'll
keep the force level there necessary to win. And it's important for the
American people to know that politics isn't going to make the decision as
to the size of our force level. The conditions on the ground will make the
decision. And part of the conditions on the ground, Terry, is a new
government, and we believe the new government is going to make a big
difference in the lives of the Iraqi people.

I told you earlier that when you attack an Iraqi now, you're at war with an
Iraqi government that's constitutionally elected. And that's a different
attitude from the way it's been in the past.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I think it's possible for the Iraqi security forces
to take control progressively of their country. That's exactly the
strategy we've outlined at the beginning. And I think it's possible to
happen in the way that Prime Minister Maliki said. For that to happen,
obviously, the first thing that we need is a strong government in Baghdad
that is prepared to enforce its writ throughout the country. My very
strong feeling, having talked to the leaders there, is that they intend
theirs to be such a government.

Secondly, what they intend is to come down very hard on those people who
want to create the circumstances where it's difficult for the Iraqi forces
to be in control. And the truth of the matter is there is no excuse now
for anyone to engage in violence in Iraq. I mean, if people's worry is to
do with being excluded from the political process, everybody has got their
place in the political process today. And, obviously, there are still
issues to do with the capability of the Iraqi forces, but all the time they
are building up, both in number and in capability, and we've got to support
that all the way through.

But I'll tell you one interesting thing from talking to all the different
groups -- because sometimes, certainly in our country, the impression is
given that the Iraqi people wish that we were gone from Iraq and weren't
there any longer in support of the Iraqi government or the Iraqi forces.
Not a single one of the people I talked to, not one of the political
leaders, from whatever part of the spectrum in Iraq that I talked to -- and
these are all people from all the different communities elected by their
people -- not one of them wanted us to pull out precipitately. All of them
wanted us to stick with it and see the job done.

Now, of course, they want to take back control of their own country fully
-- and we want them to do that. But when Prime Minister Maliki talked
about an objective timetable, what he meant was a timetable governed by
conditions on the ground. And we will be working with them now in the
coming period of time to see how we can put that framework together. But
they have a very, very clear sense of what they want the multinational
force to do. They want us there in support until they've got the
capability, and then they want us to leave and them to take full charge of
their country. And I believe that can happen.

Q One gets a clear sense of your mutual relief that a government has now
been formed, an elected government has been formed in Iraq. But,
nonetheless, the current Secretary General of the United Nations has said
that he believes that the invasion of Iraq was probably illegal. When you
look at your legacy and you look ahead to the reforms in the United Nations
you want to see, are you really saying that what you'd actually like to see
is a United Nations which could take preemptive action legally?

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I think what we need to do is to recognize that
there are threats in our world today that require us to act earlier and
more effectively. And I think we can debate the institutional structure
within which that should happen in the United Nations and elsewhere, but I
also think that when we look at this global terrorism that we face, there
is -- to me, at any rate -- a very clear link between the terrorism that is
afflicting virtually every country in the Western world, either in
actuality or potentially, the terrorism that is happening all over
different countries of the Middle East and in Asia and elsewhere, and the
terrorism that is there in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And one of the things I think, certainly for our people they find most
difficult to understand, is, they will say, well, is it -- can it be worth
everything that we are doing? I mean, it's such a huge sacrifice that is
being made. Can it be worth it? And I think the answer to that is, it is
worth it to those engaged in this violence and terrorism to try to stop us,
and we should have the same faith and confidence in our determination to
succeed as they have in their determination to make us fail.

And I think that is an issue for the whole of the international community,
because I've got no doubt at all that if we do succeed, as I believe that
we will in Iraq, difficult though it will be, and we succeed in
Afghanistan, then the whole of this global terrorism will suffer a defeat.
And that's why I think we need an international community that's capable of
recognizing these problems and acting on them.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I'd like to see a United Nations that's effective, one
that joins us in trying to rid the world of tyranny, one that is willing to
advance human rights and human dignity at its core, one that's an unabashed
organization -- is unabashed in their desire to spread freedom. That's
what I'd like to see, because I believe that freedom will yield to peace.
I also believe freedom is universal. I don't believe freedom is just a
concept only for America or Great Britain. It's a universal concept. And
it troubles me to know that there are people locked in tyrannical societies
that suffer. And the United Nations ought to be clear about its desire to
liberate people from the clutches of tyranny. That's what the United
Nations ought to be doing, as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, Steve.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. How close are you to an agreement on a
package of incentives for Iran? And what does Iran stand to gain if it
were to give up its enrichment program? And why are you ignoring these
recent back-channel overtures from Iran?

PRESIDENT BUSH: We spent a great deal of time talking about the Iranian
issue, and one of the goals that Tony and I had was to convince others in
the world that Iran, with a nuclear weapon, would be very dangerous, and
therefore, we do have a common goal. And the fundamental question is, how
do you achieve that goal, obviously. We want to do it diplomatically.

Right now, we, as a matter of fact, spent a lot of time upstairs talking
about how to convince the Iranians that this coalition we put together is
very serious. One option, of course, is through the United Nations
Security Council. And we strategized about how do we convince other
partners that the Security Council is the way to go if the Iranians won't
suspend like the EU3 has asked them to do. The Iranians walked away from
the table. They're the ones who made the decision, and the choice is
theirs. Now, if they would like to see an enhanced package, the first
thing they've got to do is suspend their operations, for the good of the
world. It's incredibly dangerous to think of an Iran with a nuclear
weapon.

And therefore, Steve, to answer your questions, of course, we'll look at
all options, but it's their choice right now. They're the folks who walked
away from the table. They're the ones who said that, your demands don't
mean anything to us.

Now, in terms of -- you said back channels --

Q Back-channel overtures.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, I read the letter of the President and I thought it
was interesting. It was, like, 16 or 17 single-spaced typed pages of --
but he didn't address the issue of whether or not they're going to continue
to press for a nuclear weapon. That's the issue at hand.

And so it's -- we have no beef with the Iranian people. As a matter of
fact, the United States respects the culture and history of Iran, and we
want there to be an Iran that's confident, and an Iran that answers to the
needs of the -- we want women in Iran to be free. At the same time, we're
going to continue to work with a government that is intransigent, that
won't budge. And so we've got to continue to work to convince them that
we're serious; that if they want to be isolated from the world, we will
work to achieve that.

Q Should this enhanced package include a light-water reactor and a
security guarantee?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Steve, you're responding to press speculation. I've just
explained to you that the Iranians walked away from the table, and that I
think we ought to be continuing to work on ways to make it clear to them
that they will be isolated. And one way to do that is to continue to work
together through the United Nations Security -- if they suspend and have
the IAEA in there making sure that the suspension is real, then, of course,
we'll talk about ways forward, incentives.

Q Prime Minister, you've both talked a little about the U.N. I know
that you believe the U.N. needs vigorous leadership and you're going to
pick up on these themes in your speech tomorrow. Is that a job
application? And, if not --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Wait a minute. (Laughter.)

Q -- do you both have a sense -- do you have someone in mind? And, if
not, how are you going to get the reform at the U.N. you want to see?

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: No, no and I'm not sure -- (laughter) -- is the
answer to those ones. Look, what we want to do is to make sure the U.N. is
an effective instrument of multilateral action. That's what everyone wants
to see. And the fact is there are multiple problems in the world; they
require the international community to respond on a collective basis -- but
you've got to have an effective set of multilateral institutions to do
that. And that's true whether you're tackling global poverty or trying to
resolve disputes or, indeed, when you're dealing with issues like Iran.

The whole point about the international community today is that these
problems are urgent, they need to be tackled. If they're not tackled the
consequences are very quickly felt around the world, and you've got to have
institutions that are capable of taking them on and tackling them and
getting action taken.

Now, we were just talking about Iran a moment ago. I mean, we want to have
this resolved through the process of the multilateral institutions.
There's a way we can do this. I mean, after all, we are the ones saying
the Atomic Energy Authority, their duties and obligations they lay upon
Iran should be adhered to. And we've got absolutely no quarrel with the
Iranian people. The Iranian people are a great people; Iran is a great
country. But it needs a government that is going to recognize that part of
being a great country is to be in line with your international obligations,
and to cease supporting those people in different parts of the world who
want, by terrorism and violence, to disrupt the process of democracy.

So I think that our position with Iran is a very reasonable one, and we
want to see how we can make progress and help them to do the things that we
believe that they should do, but they must understand that the will of the
international community is sure and is clear, and that is that the
obligations that are upon them have got to be adhered to.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Stretch.

Q Thank you, Mr. President.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I call him Stretch.

Q And I've been called worse. (Laughter.) Has Treasury Secretary Snow
given you any indication that he intends to leave his job any time soon?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Secretary of Treasury Snow?

Q Has he given you any indication he intends to leave his job any time
soon? And related to that, Americans -- macroeconomic numbers are indeed
good, but many Americans are concerned, increasingly concerned about rising
health care costs, costs of gasoline. And does that make it hard for your
administration, Treasury Secretary Snow, and everyone else to continue to
talk up the economy?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, he has not talked to me about resignation. I think
he's doing a fine job. After all, our economy is -- it's strong. We grew
at 3.5 percent last year; a good, strong first quarter this year. We added
five -- 2.5 million new jobs, we've got 4.7 percent unemployment rate
nationwide. Productivity is up, home ownership is high, small businesses
are doing well. He's done a fine job.

And our -- obviously, people are concerned about rising fuel prices -- all
the more reason to get off oil and to promote alternatives, such as ethanol
or battery technologies that will enable us to drive the first 40 miles on
electricity. We're spending about $1.2 billion over the next 10 years to
develop hydrogen fuel cells. We want -- we need to get away from
hydrocarbons here in America, for economic security, for national security,
and for environmental reasons, as well.

One way we could help alleve gasoline prices here in America is for the
Congress to pass some regulatory relief so we can actually expand refining
capacity. We haven't built a new refinery here since the 1970s. And
curiously enough, when demand for a product goes up with tight supply,
price follows. And so we put out some logical ways for Congress to work
with the administration to relieve price pressures on gasoline.

As far as health care goes, there are some practical ways to deal with
health care costs, and one of the most practical ways is to get rid of
these junk lawsuits that are running good doctors out of practice and
running up the price of medicine. Passed it out of the House. They can't
get it out of the Senate because the lawyers won't let it out. But we put
forth a common-sense practice to deal with rising health care costs, as
well.

Q You both presented the Iraqi government as a substantial vindication
of the conflict. Do you also accept, as a matter of harsh political
reality, that the Iraq conflict has also left both of you politically
weakened and, whether justly or unjustly, less able to give the kind of
moral leadership that you're discussing today?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No question that the Iraq war has created a sense of
consternation here in America. I mean, when you turn on your TV screen and
see innocent people die, day in and day out, it affects the mentality of
our country.

But here's what they're asking in America. They're asking, can we win?
That's what they want to know. Do we have a strategy for victory? And so
the talk about the unity government -- you might remember there was some --
a lot of speculation as to whether there would even be a unity government.
A couple of months ago, people were saying, well, they can't even get a
unity government going. But we have a unity government -- a Kurd
President, a Prime Minister who is a Shia, a Speaker who is a Sunni. These
are strong leaders. It's an indication that progress is being made.

Part of progress, of course, is on the political track. You know, we had
elections in Iraq; 12 million people voted last December. Now, it seems
like an eternity ago, I know, like a decade. But that's not all that long
ago in the larger scope of things. Twelve million people said, we want to
be free. It was an astounding moment. And this unity government is now
formed, as a result of those elections, under a constitution approved by
the Iraqi people. That's progress. It's certainly a far sight from the
days of a tyrant who killed hundreds of thousands of his own people and
used weapons of mass destruction and threatened the neighborhood. I mean,
that is progress.

No question, however, that the suiciders and the killers and the IEDs and
the deaths have an effect on the American people. But one of the reasons
that I appreciate Tony coming is that he brings a fresh perspective of what
he saw, and the American people need to know we are making progress toward
a goal of an Iraq that can defend itself, sustain itself and govern itself.
That will deny the terrorists a safe haven.

You know, al Qaeda has made it clear what their intentions are in Iraq.
I'm sure you've read some of the intercepts that are laid out there for
people to see. And they have made it clear that it's just a matter of time
for countries like Great Britain and the United States to leave. In other
words, if they make life miserable enough, we'll leave. And they want us
to leave because they want a safe haven from which to launch attacks, not
only on us, but on moderate Muslim governments, as well. These people are
totalitarians. They're Islamic fascists. They have a point of view, they
have a philosophy, and they want to impose that philosophy on the rest of
the world. And Iraq just happens to be a -- one of the battles in the war
on terror.

And Tony brings up a good point: Why are they resisting so hard, what is
it about democracy they can't stand? Well, what they can't stand about
democracy is this: Democracy is the exact opposite of what they believe.
They believe they can impose their will, they believe there's no freedom of
religion, they believe there's no women's rights. They have a -- they have
a dark vision of the world, and that's why they're resisting so mightily.

So yes, I can understand why the American people are troubled by the war in
Iraq. I understand that. But I also believe the sacrifice is worth it and
is necessary, and I believe a free Iraq is not only going to make ourselves
more secure, but it's going to serve as a powerful example in the Middle
East.

You know, foreign policy, for awhile, just basically said, if it seems okay
on the surface, just let it be. And guess what happened? There was
resentment and hatred that enabled these totalitarians to recruit and to
kill, which they want to continue to do to achieve their objectives. And
the best way to defeat them in the long run is through the spread of
liberty.

And liberty has had the capacity to change enemies to allies. Liberty has
had the capacity to help Europe become whole, free, and at peace. History
has proven that freedom has got the capacity to change the world for the
better, and that's what you're seeing.

You know, the amazing thing about dealing with Prime Minister Blair is
never once has he said to me on the phone, we better change our tactics
because of the political opinion polls. And I appreciate that steadfast
leadership. And I appreciate somebody who has got a vision, a shared
vision, for how to not only protect ourselves in the war on terror, but how
to make the world a better place.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I don't really think it's a matter of our
vindication. I think, in a way, that's the least important part of it.
But I do think that occasionally we should just take a step back and ask,
why are we doing this? Why is it so important?

Saddam was removed from power three years ago. Since then, incidentally,
our forces have been there with the United Nations mandate and with the
consent of the Iraqi government, itself, the Iraqi government, becoming
progressively more the product of direct democracy.

So whatever people thought about removing Saddam -- you agree with it, you
didn't agree with it for these last three years, the issue in Iraq has not
been, these people are here without any international support, because we
haven't had any United Nations resolution governing our presence there.
The issue is not, you're there, but the Iraqi people don't want you there,
because the Iraqi government, and now this directly-elected Iraqi
government has said they want us to stay until the job is done.

So why is it that for three years, we have had this violence and bloodshed?
Now, people have tried to say it's because the Iraqi people -- you people,
you don't understand; you went in with this Western concept of democracy
and you didn't understand that their whole culture was different, they
weren't interested in these types of freedom. These people have gone out
and voted -- a higher turnout, I have to say -- I'm afraid to say, I think,
than either your election or mine. These people have gone out and voted --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Which one? 2000 or 2004? (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I think both of them.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I think you're right. (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: They have gone out and voted despite terrorism,
despite bloodshed, despite literally the prospect of death for exercising
their democratic right.

So they have kept faith with the very democratic values that we say we
believe in, and the people trying to wrest that democracy from them are
opposed to absolutely everything we stand for and everything the Iraqi
people stand for.

So what do we do in response to this? And the problem we have is very,
very simple. A large part of the perspective with which we look at this is
to see every act of terrorism in Iraq, every piece of ghastly carnage on
our television screens, every tragic loss of our own forces -- we see that
as a setback and as a failure when we should be seeing that as a renewed
urgency for us to rise to the challenge of defeating these people who are
committing this carnage. Because over these past three years, at every
stage, the reason they have been fighting is not, as we can see, because
Iraqi people don't believe in democracy, Iraqi people don't want liberty.
It is precisely because they fear Iraqi people do want democracy, Iraqi
people do want liberty.

And if the idea became implanted in the minds of people in the Arab and
Muslim world that democracy was as much their right as our right, where do
these terrorists go? What do they do? How do they recruit? How do they
say, America is the evil Satan? How do they say the purpose of the West is
to spoil your lands, wreck your religion, take your wealth? How can they
say that? They can't say that.

So these people who are fighting us there know what is at stake. The
question is, do we?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I'm going to say, that was a great answer. (Laughter.)

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Yours was pretty good, too. (Laughter.)

Q You have your chance now. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT BUSH: Another chance -- good. Well, thank you, Martha.

Q Mr. President, you have said time and time again, and again tonight,
when Iraqi forces stand up, coalition forces can start standing down.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Right.

Q But the fact is, you have been standing up Iraqi forces in great
numbers. The administration says you have hundreds of thousand trained and
equipped, tens of thousand leading the fight. And yet, during the same
period they've been standing up there has not been a substantial decrease
in U.S. and coalition forces. So what does that tell us about how
meaningful the figures are on Iraqi troops? And what does that tell us
about a potential for a draw-down?

PRESIDENT BUSH: It tells you that the commanders on the ground are going
to make the decision, that's what that tells you. And when they feel
comfortable in recommending to me fewer troops, I will accept that. But
they're going to make that recommendation based upon the conditions on the
ground. I know I keep saying that, and it probably bores you that I keep
giving the same answer, but I haven't changed my opinion.

I talk to our commanders all the time. They feel strongly that the Iraqi
army is getting better. It's hard to have a command and control system
with an Iraqi army when you don't have a defense minister. And so Mr.
Maliki is going to have to pick one soon. And then our commanders will
gauge as to whether or not the command and control structure is sufficient
to be able to enable the Iraqis to take more of the fight. They are taking
more of the fight, by the way. They're in more provinces than ever before.
They're taking over more territory. They're taking over more missions.
There are some gaps that we need to continue to work on to fill -- the
transportation issue is going to need to be dealt with over time.

All I can report to you is what General Casey -- in whom I have got a lot
of confidence -- tells me, and that is the Iraqis are becoming better and
better fighters. And at some point in time, when he feels like the
government is ready to take on more responsibility and the Iraqi forces are
able to help them do so, he will get on the telephone with me and say, Mr.
President, I think we can do this with fewer troops. We've been up to
165,000 at one point; we're at about 135,000 now.

Q (Inaudible.)

PRESIDENT BUSH: Hold on for a second. Actually, he moved some additional
troops from Kuwait into Baghdad. Conditions on the ground were such that
we needed more support in Baghdad, to secure Baghdad, so he informed me,
through Donald Rumsfeld, that he wanted to move troops out of Kuwait into
Baghdad.

So these commanders, they need to have flexibility in order to achieve the
objective. You don't want politicians making decisions based upon
politics. You want the Commander-in-Chief making decisions based upon what
the military thinks is the right way to achieve the objective. I've set
the objective, it's clear for everybody -- a country that can sustain
itself, defend itself and govern itself. And we're making progress on all
fronts. But as to how many troops we have there will depend upon the
generals and their commanders saying, this is what we need to do the job,
Mr. President, and that's the way it's going to be so long as I'm standing
here as the Commander-in-Chief, which is two-and-a-half more years.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I spoke to General Casey and to our own General Fry
in Baghdad on Monday. We sat down and talked this very issue through. And
I think what you will find is that progressively there will be more and
more parts of Iraq that are policed by the Iraqi security forces
themselves, and their capability is improving. But I also think you will
find probably over the next few months there will be a real attempt by the
anti-democratic forces to test them very, very strongly. And remember, a
lot of the attacks are now happening not on the multinational force,
although those attacks continue, of course, but actually on the Iraqi
forces themselves, on their police, on their army and so on. And the
purpose, of course, of that is to deter them from the very buildup of
capability that we want to see.

But over the course of the next few months, you will see progressively
those provinces in Iraq coming under Iraqi control, and then, of course, it
will be for the Iraqis to sort out that responsibility.

PRESIDENT BUSH: One thing, Martha, is that we want to make sure we
complete the mission, that we achieve our objective. A loss in Iraq would
make this world an incredibly dangerous place. Remember there is not only
sectarian violence, a hangover from Saddam's era, but there is an al Qaeda
presence, in the form of Zarqawi, who wants to sow as much havoc as
possible to cause us to leave before the mission is complete.

Listen, I want our troops out, don't get me wrong. I understand what it
means to have troops in harm's way. And I know there's a lot of families
making huge sacrifices here in America. I'll be going to a Memorial Day
ceremony next Monday paying tribute to those who have lost their life. I'm
sure I will see families of the fallen. I fully understand the pressures
being placed upon our military and their families. But I also understand
that it is vital that we -- that we do the job, that we complete the
mission. And it has been tough, it's been really tough, because we're
fighting an unconventional enemy that is willing to kill innocent people.
There are no rules of war for these people. But make no mistake about it,
what you're seeing in Iraq could happen all over the world if we don't
stand fast and achieve the objective.

No, I had the follow-up answer, you can't have a follow-up question. Nice
try, though.

Q Prime Minister, this is possibly your last official visit to
Washington as Prime Minister --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Wait a minute. (Laughter.) Back-to-back disses.

Q At least the beginning of the end of your particular special
relationship. Will you miss the President? What will you miss about him?
(Laughter.)

And for the President, what will you miss about Tony Blair, and what are
you looking for in an eventual replacement?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Hmmm -- I'll miss those red ties, is what I'll miss.
(Laughter.) I'll say one thing -- he can answer the question -- don't
count him out. Let me tell it to you that way. I know a man of resolve
and vision and courage. And my attitude is, I want him to be here so long
as I'm the President.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Well, what more can I say? (Laughter.) Probably
not wise to say anything more at all. (Laughter.)

You guys, come on, I want you to -- the British delegation, ask a few
serious questions. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT BUSH: Right.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Or we'll go on to one of you guys. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT BUSH: Plante.

Q Perhaps I can change the mood. Mr. President, you talk about setting
the objective. But our people, my colleagues on the ground in Iraq, say
that when they talk to American troops, the rank and file, they say they
don't believe that they've had enough to do the job. They say further that
while the Iraqi army may be improving, there is absolutely no way to depend
upon the police, who they say are corrupt and aligned with militias. All
of this going on -- what reason is there to believe that the new government
can do any better with these people than we've been able to do so far?

PRESIDENT BUSH: There are several tracks, Bill. One is the political
track. I think it's very important for the Iraqi people to have a
government that has been elected under a constitution they approved. In
other words, the political track has been a vital part of having a country
that can govern itself and defend itself.

There's a security track. And there's no question that there are a lot of
Iraqis trained to fight, and many of them are good fighters -- 117,000 have
been trained and equipped. There needs to be more equipment; no question
about that. The Iraqis -- I think if you were get a -- at least the
assessment I get, is that the Iraqi army is moving well along and they're
taking more and more of the territory over in order to defend their
country.

No question we've got a lot of work to do on the police. General Casey has
said publicly that the year 2006 is -- is the year that we'll train the
police up and running. Perhaps the place where there needs to be the most
effective police force is in Baghdad. I just told you we're moving more
troops in. There's a -- General Casey met today with the Prime Minister to
talk about how to secure Baghdad. It's really important that Baghdad --
that a capital city become more secure. And there's plans to deal with the
contingencies on the ground. All I can tell you is, is that we're making
progress toward the goal.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: And I'd like to say something, again, about the
discussions I had on Monday. I think that what is important is to try and
get a sense of balance in this. Look, it would be completely foolish for
us to say, there are no problems with either the police or the army, you've
got a full force capability in the way that we want. And nobody is
actually saying that.

It would also be wrong to turn it around the other way, though, even in
respect to the police. I had quite a detailed discussion, not, in fact,
with the generals, but some of the ordinary soldiers who -- British
soldiers there up in Baghdad, and also with some of the people who are
working with the police at the moment. And what they said to me is, yes,
there are real problems to do with corruption in parts of the police force,
but actually, there is also another side to it, which there are people who
are really dedicated and really committed to a non-sectarian Iraq, who also
are playing their part.

Now I think the whole question is whether this new government can then grip
this in the way, in a sense, that only they can. You see, I think this is
where, inevitably, over time, we have to transfer responsibility. And that
is, of course, what we wish to do, and part of that is because it is easier
for an Iraqi interior minister who is the product of an Iraqi-elected
government, to go in and take the really tough measure sometimes that is
necessary to sort some of these issues out.

But I can assure you of two things. First of all, there is another, more
positive side to the Iraqi forces -- both the army, and in parts of the
police, as well. And, secondly, the Iraqi government knows that this is
the absolute prerequisite of success for them. It's just -- one of the
ministers said to me, he said, you should understand, our state was a
completely failed state; the police -- people didn't go to the police in
Iraq if they had a problem under Saddam. They had a problem if they were
in contact with the police because of the way the state was run.

And so you're talking about literally building the institutions of a state
from scratch. And I don't think it's, in one sense, very surprising that
it is both difficult and taking time. But I think that they do know that
this is of vital importance for them to succeed. And I think that you may
find that it is easier for Iraqis to do this themselves and take some of
these measures necessary, than it is for us, although we would be there,
obviously, in support of what they're doing.

Q Mr. President, you spoke about missteps and mistakes in Iraq. Could I
ask both of you which missteps and mistakes of your own you most regret?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Sounds like kind of a familiar refrain here -- saying
"bring it on," kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to
people. I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little
more sophisticated manner -- you know, "wanted dead or alive," that kind of
talk. I think in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted, and so
I learned from that. And I think the biggest mistake that's happened so
far, at least from our country's involvement in Iraq is Abu Ghraib. We've
been paying for that for a long period of time. And it's -- unlike Iraq,
however, under Saddam, the people who committed those acts were brought to
justice. They've been given a fair trial and tried and convicted.

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I think inevitably some of the things that we
thought were going to be the biggest challenge proved not to be, and some
of the things we didn't expect to be challenges at all proved to be
immense. I think that probably in retrospect -- though at the time it was
very difficult to argue this -- we could have done the de-Baathification in
a more differentiated way than we did.

I think that the most difficult thing, however, has been the determination
of people to move against the democratic process in Iraq in a way that I
think -- as I was saying a moment or two ago -- indicates our opponents'
very clear view from a very early stage that they have to stop the
democratic process working. And I think it's easy to go back over mistakes
that we may have made, but the biggest reason why Iraq has been difficult
is the determination of our opponents to defeat us. And I don't think we
should be surprised at that.

Maybe in retrospect, when we look back, it should have been very obvious to
us, and is obvious still in Afghanistan that for them, it is very clear.
You know, they can't afford to have these countries turned round, and I
think that probably, there was a whole series of things in Iraq that were
bound to come out once you got al Qaeda and other groups operating in there
to cause maximum destruction and damage. And therefore, I'm afraid in the
end, we're always going to have to be prepared for the fall of Saddam not
to be the rise of democratic Iraq, that it was going to be a more difficult
process.